<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (3) TMI 596 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119126</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the benefit of duty credit to the appellants as the supplier paid the duty and interest for the related consignment, and the Adjudicating Commissioner found no involvement of the appellants in the supplier&#039;s fraudulent actions. Thus, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2012 12:04:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 596 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119126</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the benefit of duty credit to the appellants as the supplier paid the duty and interest for the related consignment, and the Adjudicating Commissioner found no involvement of the appellants in the supplier&#039;s fraudulent actions. Thus, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119126</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>